Alarming News: I like Morgan Freeberg. A lot.
American Digest: And I like this from "The Blog That Nobody Reads", because it is -- mostly -- about me. What can I say? I'm on an ego trip today. It won't last.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: We were following a trackback and thinking "hmmm... this is a bloody excellent post!", and then we realized that it was just part III of, well, three...Damn. I wish I'd written those.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: ...I just remembered that I found a new blog a short while ago, House of Eratosthenes, that I really like. I like his common sense approach and his curiosity when it comes to why people believe what they believe rather than just what they believe.
Brutally Honest: Morgan Freeberg is brilliant.
Dr. Melissa Clouthier: Morgan Freeberg at House of Eratosthenes (pftthats a mouthful) honors big boned women in skimpy clothing. The picture there is priceless--keep scrolling down.
Exile in Portales: Via Gerard: Morgan Freeberg, a guy with a lot to say. And he speaks The Truth...and it's fascinating stuff. Worth a read, or three. Or six.
Just Muttering: Two nice pieces at House of Eratosthenes, one about a perhaps unintended effect of the Enron mess, and one on the Gore-y environ-movie.
Mein Blogovault: Make "the Blog that No One Reads" one of your daily reads.
The Virginian: I know this post will offend some people, but the author makes some good points.
Poetic Justice: Cletus! Ah gots a laiv one fer yew...
So one of the bloggresses we follow, a particularly enchanting and intelligent one, got hold of a phony egghead study that says something completely ridiculous and decided to believe every word in it. Said phony egghead study concerns something men and women are simply not going to see the same way — ever — and it was obviously written up by a chick for other chicks. So don’t be too hard on Dr. Mel, she’s a chick too.
Besides of which it goes without saying her judgment is not perfect. Far from it. She put together a list of hot and sexy conservative blogger guys, and left us off of it. Just like that. So, you know, she’s got her on-days and her off-days. So do we all.
Here’s what the study says. Hope you’re sitting down for this one, guys. Here it is. Ready? — We, on our side of the gender aisle, have a much narrower and uniform definition of the ideal woman, than women have of the ideal man. They like variety more than we do.
Isn’t that a riot?
Quoting myself, at Dr. Melissa’s place, trying to inject some reason and common sense into it —
Try this: In an urban setting, pick out the women who are, or successfully project the appearance of being, the creme de la creme of genetic perfection. Top tenth of a percent. Women who can have whichever guy they want. Now let your eyes drift off two feet to the left or right…to the dude. Oh no, you don’t really need to, you already know what he looks like don’t you? Cookie cutter. Mass produced. No variety whatsoever.
He’s 6?2? but he wears a sleeveless shirt built for someone who’s 8?2?. He’s got goofy shorts on that come down well past the knee. Gold chain or two about the neck, which is thicker than his head. Sort of a flesh Michelin-man. Or a chubby round little boy decked out in his dad’s summer clothes, and then you triple the size of the whole thing. Plus an obligatory tattoo. Right now the hair on the head is half an inch long, or gone entirely, so it doesn’t much matter what color it is. Skin is not white, not black, something in between. Mixed ethnicity, or Caucasian with a really good tan. Cash-register jaw. Think Jay Leno, Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson, Howie Long.
These guys could’ve been built on a conveyor belt.
I went on to cite the example of girls-in-glasses; and now that I give it another think, I’m ready to pin my entire argument on that one thing. Guys, I can tell you, are split even-Steven on this, right down the middle. Of course I’m not split at all. Guys-in-general are split. Half the dudes recoil in horror at the genetic inferiority (or lifetime curiosity about the written word) that imprisons a fair maiden behind the corrective lenses…the other half of us are intrigued, and not mildly.
After glasses, there is the height thing. Do you have to stop seeing her if she’s taller? And then the big-nose thing. A lot of guys don’t notice, a lot of other guys can’t stand a big nose on a girl. And then there are the breasts. The arm muscles. Her thighs aren’t curvy enough, or they’re too thin…huge issue for some guys, not worth mentioning to other guys.
We aren’t all scrambling for the same model of girl. Just take my word for it.
But I’ll let all that other stuff go. I’m willing to rest the entire thing, like I said, just on the reading glasses. Because it’s personal…they’re my Achilles’ Heel, my Kryptonite. Probably because of the very first girlfriend that started all that trouble. Thirty-five years now — I don’t quite have the balls to jot down on the front page of a blog sitting right there on the innerwebs, exactly what a nice-lookin’ gal in glasses does to the thoughts in my head. But she certainly does something, I’ll say that much. And all guys on the planet do not agree with me about it.
We got variety in what tickles our fancy, trust me on this. Dustin Wood and Claudia Brumbaugh might have missed it, but it’s there, I’m in a position to guarantee it.
I think this is one of those many, many examples where the way women see things, seems to be a whole lot more real than the way the fellas see things — because women do a lot more talking.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
OH, yeah about women in glasses.
In the ’20s some aphorist came up with this:
“Men don’t make passes at girls who wear glasses.”
To which Dorothy Parker, bless her heart, responded:
“It depends on the frames.”
- rob | 07/01/2009 @ 15:54Yep. I have to admit being partial to women with glasses. If it weren’t as common a preference as it is, the Japanese wouldn’t have a word specifically for it.
- wheels | 07/01/2009 @ 23:50I think the corrective eyewear can serve to make a woman look intelligent.
That said, I think its a good thing that guys aren’t monolithic in what kind of women appeal to them. If they were, then 100% of us would be chasing 10% of the women, and we’d be literally trying to kill each other in the process of getting their attention.
The remaining 90% of the girls would be standing around, looking at the fracas from afar and wondering why the hell none of them can get a date.
I see enough of this type of complaining as it is, especially from women that are a few pounds overweight or have passed the 40 age mark. Of course, I would tell them that they simply haven’t given it enough time (or are looking in the wrong places), that there are indeed men out there that would give them a second look. What’s killing their attractiveness right now isn’t the age or the poundage…it’s the attitude that men are all shallow jerks who are looking for Playboy bunnies.
- cylarz | 07/02/2009 @ 02:48What’s killing their attractiveness right now isn’t the age or the poundage…it’s the attitude that men are all shallow jerks who are looking for Playboy bunnies.
– cylarz | July 2, 2009 @ 2:48 am
+1
The attitude you so aptly describe is the outgrowth of early “feminism” in the ’70s, when wives harangued their husbands to be more like Alan Alda, and then left them for John Wayne. An awful lot of good men eventually gave up.
- rob | 07/02/2009 @ 12:37